lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: thoughts on kernel security issues
* Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote:
> On Iau, 2005-01-13 at 21:03, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Alan Cox wrote:
> > - no embargo, no rules, but "private" in the sense that it's supposed to
> > be for kernel developers only or at least people who won't take
> > advantage of it.
> >
> > _I_ think this is the one that makes sense. No hard rules, but private
> > enough that people won't feel _guilty_ about reporting problems. Right
> > now I sometimes get private email from people who don't want to point
> > out some local DoS or similar, and that can certainly get lost in the
> > flow.
>
> And also not passed on to vendors and other folks which is a pita and
> this would fix
> >
> > - _short_ embargo, for kernel-only. I obviously believe that vendor-sec
> > is whoring itself for security firms and vendors. I believe there would
> > be a place for something with stricter rules on disclosure.
>
> Seems these two could be the same list with a bit of respect for users
> wishes and common sense.

I think they should be the same. I hope the draft security contact bits
reflect that.

thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.456 / U:0.668 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site